You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

January 21, 2026

Growing Canadian Investment in Southeast Asia: An Interview with Andrew Stoutley, COO of Tilleke & Gibbins

Thai-Canadian Chamber of Commerce

Spurred by global geopolitics and Canada’s Indo-Pacific Strategy, which aims to forge deeper ties with ASEAN, Canadian companies have been showing growing interest in Thailand and Southeast Asia in recent years. To understand the opportunities offered by the region, we sat down with Andrew Stoutley, a Toronto native and the chief operating officer of Tilleke & Gibbins, a leading Southeast Asian regional law firm with over 130 years of history in Thailand.

Q: Why are Canadian companies looking at Thailand and Southeast Asia right now?

A: Two reasons stand out. First, diversification has moved up the agenda. Many Canadian companies want options outside North America due to tariff volatility and policy uncertainty in the United States, as well as questions around the next Canada–United States–Mexico Agreement mandatory joint review. At the same time, the shift of global production from China to Southeast Asia is accelerating, driven by rising costs, geopolitics, and the need to avoid overreliance on a single market. As a result, Canadian companies are looking for a second production base or a regional hub, and Thailand and its neighbors are natural choices given their manufacturing depth, location, and established supply chains.

Second, Canada’s own efforts in the region are gaining traction. The Indo-Pacific Strategy has led to more on-the-ground support, including larger trade missions, upgraded diplomatic posts, and new financing options. Export Development Canada (EDC) now has a presence in Bangkok, giving Canadian companies a direct line to financing and insurance in Thailand. There’s also steady progress on trade frameworks like the recently signed Canada–Indonesia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (which will come into effect pending domestic procedures), ongoing negotiations of a Canada–ASEAN FTA, and the exciting announcement about the launch of negotiations of a Canada–Thailand FTA. Together, these developments have the potential to make it much easier for Canadian businesses to enter and operate in the region.

Q: What makes Thailand a good base for a regional strategy?

A: Thailand combines a strong industrial base with reliable infrastructure and a skilled workforce, with lower costs than Singapore or Hong Kong, making Bangkok a practical and affordable hub for managing operations across Southeast Asia. The Thai Board of Investment offers incentives for targeted sectors, which can make a real difference in the early years of a project. And Thailand’s comparatively stable business and legal environment—marked by predictable regulation, established licensing routes, and reliable dispute resolution—underpins regional planning and execution.

To take advantage of all that Thailand has to offer, however, planning is key. Early on, companies should check whether available incentives fit their plans, make sure they fully understand foreign ownership limits and the local regulatory environment, and build relationships on the ground. When eyeing a regional strategy, it’s also important to remember that Southeast Asia isn’t one market. A plan that fits Thailand may need to be reworked in Vietnam or Cambodia, as each country has different approvals, data rules, local director requirements, and employment norms. The right mindset is to build a regional model that can be localized, not a single template you try to force everywhere.

Q: What sectors are you seeing the most interest in from Canadian companies?

A: Advanced manufacturing and the EV ecosystem are attracting significant interest. Clean energy and energy efficiency are busy as more climate finance becomes available. Digital services and fintech are very active. We’re also seeing a lot of interest in agribusiness, healthcare and life sciences, logistics and supply chain, education, and tourism and hospitality. The common thread is that Canada’s priorities and Thailand’s policy goals are lining up, which makes it easier to build projects both sides want to see succeed.

Q: For companies entering Thailand or Southeast Asia, what should they look for in a legal partner?

A: Look for two things: an international service mindset and real local depth. If you’re a multinational, you need a firm that has worked with foreign companies and understands how your in-house team operates, what your timelines look like, and how you measure risk. At the same time, you need advisors who know how the law is applied day to day—what works with regulators, what commercial terms are consistent with market norms, and what issues are likely to arise. When those two elements come together, you gain the confidence of clear, reliable guidance that helps you navigate complex markets with minimal disruption.

Track record matters too. Tilleke & Gibbins has acted for inbound investors in Thailand for more than a century and, in recent years, across the rest of Southeast Asia. Most of our clients are multinational companies, so our approach to service is built around their expectations, backed by local judgment and relationships.

Q: As COO of Tilleke & Gibbins, how do you make sure your operations actually translate into better outcomes for clients?

A: I think about the COO role as creating the conditions for great client work. For us, that starts with making a regional firm feel seamless to a client running a project across Thailand, Vietnam, and beyond. Our team members have spent years working closely together across offices and practice areas so the quality is consistent, while still reflecting the realities on the ground in each jurisdiction. By working as one team across borders and disciplines, we’re able to support clients with the full range of services they need to succeed in Southeast Asia’s dynamic markets.

I’ve been with Tilleke & Gibbins for nearly 20 years, and what keeps me here is the culture. It’s collaborative. When a client brings us a complex mandate—say, a cross-border investment that cuts across regulatory matters, employment, data, and tax—we can quickly assemble a team that’s technically strong and commercially minded.

Innovation helps too. We use secure generative AI tools to accelerate routine work—first drafts, clause comparisons, issue spotting—so our lawyers can focus on strategy and judgment. Everything goes through human review by our lawyers, with strict confidentiality and approval guardrails. The result is faster turnaround, clearer documents, and better consistency in the work we’re delivering to clients.

Q: Any final advice for Canadian executives who are thinking about setting up in Thailand?

A: Start with a plan that can scale across the region, but don’t skip the country-by-country details. Lean on the Canadian institutions here to help, like the EDC, the Trade Commissioner Service, and CanCham’s great network. Track progress on the Canada–ASEAN and Canada–Thailand FTAs, and use these tools to design supply chains that reduce exposure to U.S. policy swings. Combine that support with good local advice, and Thailand provides a strong base for long-term growth.

 

This interview was originally published in issue 1/2026 of Voyageur, the magazine of CanCham Thailand (Thai-Canadian Chamber of Commerce).

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 3, 2026
On July 23, 2026, the Bank of Thailand (BOT) released for public comment its draft Notification on Digital Channel Security, which would significantly expand the scope and stringency of Thailand’s existing mobile banking security framework. If finalized in its current form, the draft notification would extend mandatory security requirements to credit card providers and credit providers, cover internet banking in addition to mobile applications, phase out SMS one-time passwords (OTPs) for transaction authentication, and introduce biometric verification requirements for high-value transactions. The public comment period is open through August 24, 2026. Background The BOT’s existing Mobile Banking Security Notification, issued in 2024, sets minimum security standards for financial institutions, specialized financial institutions (SFIs), and e-money providers, significantly reducing “money-draining app” fraud. However, fraudsters have since shifted to nonbank providers and internet banking channels, prompting the BOT to propose broader security requirements. Expanded Scope of Regulated Entities and Channels The existing Mobile Banking Security Notification covers only financial institutions, SFIs, and e-money providers offering mobile banking services. The draft expands coverage in two key areas: entities and channels. On the entity side, it adds credit card providers and credit providers that offer fund transfers to third parties at other financial service providers or that provide cash withdrawal services to individual retail customers. On the channel side, it broadens coverage to include internet banking in addition to mobile banking. Strengthened Customer Authentication The draft introduces enhanced authentication requirements in three areas: Service enrollment and device changes. Providers must implement rigorous identity verification, notify customers of enrollment results through out-of-band communication channels, and adopt risk-mitigation measures such as cooling-off periods and temporary transaction limits. Transaction-level authentication. Providers must use two-factor authentication for fund transfers, cardless ATM withdrawals, and transaction limit increases. Secure authentication factors. Key requirements include the following: “What-you-know” factors must
July 28, 2026
Data protection officers (DPOs) have become a fixture of Thailand’s privacy compliance landscape since the Personal Data Protection Act B.E. 2562 (2019) (PDPA) took full effect and the Office of the Personal Data Protection Committee (PDPC) began requiring certain organizations to appoint them. On July 7, 2026, the Office of the PDPC presented draft guidance on DPOs as part of a public consultation on a series of draft personal data protection manuals and recommendations. The draft offers the clearest indication yet of how the regulator expects the DPO role to work in practice, addressing recurring implementation issues under the PDPA—including when an organization must appoint a DPO, how the DPO should operate independently, how to manage conflicts of interest, and how data subjects and regulators should be able to contact the DPO. Because it remains in draft, organizations have an opportunity to weigh the practical implications now before the guidance is finalized. When a DPO Must Be Appointed The draft guidance clarifies the triggers for mandatory DPO appointment, including: Regular and systematic monitoring of personal data or systems on a large scale, such as tracking, analyzing, or predicting behavior, attitudes, or individual characteristics. Core activities involving large-scale processing of sensitive personal data, such as health data, biometric data, or criminal records. Certain foreign-organization representative arrangements. Public-sector coverage under relevant notifications identifying government entities that must appoint a DPO. Processing involving 100,000 or more data subjects may be considered large-scale. The guidance also contemplates voluntary DPO appointment for organizations that wish to raise their privacy governance standards, and such organizations should still comply with the standards applicable to DPOs under the law. Independence and Reporting Lines The draft guidance identifies lack of DPO independence as a core risk because an ineffective or constrained DPO may be unable to raise deficiencies
July 27, 2026
Vietnam’s new E-Commerce Law, which took effect on 1 July 2026 along with its implementing Decree No. 248/2026/ND-CP (Decree 248), marks a significant development in the country’s approach to online intellectual property (IP) enforcement, reflecting a clear shift from a reactive model of intermediary liability to one that expects platforms to play a more active role in preventing infringement. From notice-and-takedown to platform responsibility The most significant change introduced by the E-Commerce Law is the transformation of the legal role of e-commerce platforms. The existing safe harbor provisions under the IP Law and the copyright notice-and-takedown regime established by Decree 17/2023/ND-CP (Decree 17) largely required intermediaries to act only after receiving notice of infringement. Once infringing content had been removed, the platform’s legal obligation was generally considered fulfilled. The new legislation adopts a fundamentally different approach. Article 17 of the E-Commerce Law requires intermediary platforms to screen information relating to goods and services before publication in order to prevent listings involving counterfeit or IP-infringing goods, and goods of unknown origin. Rather than relying exclusively on complaints from rights holders, platforms are now expected to implement preventive measures before infringing listings become publicly available. Decree 248 further requires platforms to update keyword filters based on recommendations issued by competent authorities. These filtering mechanisms are intended to prevent prohibited listings from appearing on the platform and represent a further move away from a purely complaint-driven enforcement model. The legislation also introduces Vietnam’s first statutory stay-down obligation. Under the E-Commerce Law and Decree 248, major digital platforms must maintain automated systems capable of reviewing, warning against, and removing unlawful listings while also implementing measures to prevent repeat violations, defined under Decree 248 as conduct that has previously been identified and handled by the platform, but continues to recur. This obligation addresses one
July 27, 2026
A new decree on penalties for violations related to the crypto asset market creates compliance risks for offshore crypto asset exchanges in Vietnam that do not hold, and practically cannot obtain, a Vietnamese license, and for Vietnamese users who continue to transact on those platforms. Decree No. 284/2026/ND-CP (Decree 284), issued by the government of Vietnam on July 16, 2026, formally establishes an administrative penalty framework for violations related to crypto assets and the crypto asset market. The decree takes effect on September 1, 2026, and will remain in force for the duration of the five-year pilot program under Resolution No. 05/2025/NQ-CP, which is scheduled to end in September 2030. Direct Penalties on Vietnamese Users The most immediate commercial risk to offshore platforms is that their Vietnamese users now face direct personal liability for using their exchanges. Vietnamese users who trade crypto assets outside of a Ministry of Finance-licensed service provider face fines of up to VND 50 million (approximately USD 1,900). Vietnamese users trading in crypto assets that are offered or issued to foreign users face higher penalties of up to VND 100 million (approximately USD 3,800). It is expected that Vietnamese users will be more willing to migrate away from offshore platforms now that there is a risk of real enforcement against them. Penalties on Unlicensed Service Providers Violations of providing crypto asset services or advertising crypto-related services without a license face fines of up to VND 200 million (approximately USD 7,700). Operating a crypto asset trading market without proper authorization falls within the same highest penalty bands. Organizations that violate issuance, provision, or disclosure rules may face fines of up to VND 200 million. Although the maximum administrative fine per violation is capped at VND 200 million for organizations and VND 100 million for individuals, these